IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v222y2011i3p427-436.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantifying ecological thresholds from response surfaces

Author

Listed:
  • Lintz, Heather E.
  • McCune, Bruce
  • Gray, Andrew N.
  • McCulloh, Katherine A.

Abstract

Ecological thresholds are abrupt changes of ecological state. While an ecological threshold is a widely accepted concept, most empirical methods detect them in time or across geographic space. Although useful, these approaches do not quantify the direct drivers of threshold response. Causal understanding of thresholds detected empirically requires their investigation in a multi-factor domain containing the direct drivers (often referred to as state space). Here, we present an approach to quantify thresholds from response surfaces modeled empirically in state space. We present two indices of shape attributes measured from response surfaces. The response surfaces are built using a regression method in state space. The indices are threshold strength (T) and diagonality (D). We use 48 simulated response surfaces of different shapes to test the efficacy of the indices in 3D. Our results show that T is sensitive to the steepness of the transition from one state to the next, with various forms of abrupt, centralized thresholds yielding the highest values among the simulated surfaces. D represents the orientation of the response surface or the simultaneous influence of more than one predictor in eliciting the response gradient. Strongly diagonal surfaces have the most diagonal surface area demonstrated by sharply undulating diagonal surfaces. Given that the success of T and D requires a regression method to accurately capture any shape of complex data structure, we also test the accuracy of empirical regression methods known to be tractable with complex data. We test classification and regression trees (CART), Random Forest, and non-parametric multiplicative regression (NPMR) for binary and continuous responses. We use the 48 simulated response surfaces to test the methods, and we find that prediction accuracy depends on both the T and D of the simulated data for each method. We choose the most accurate method among those we test for capturing any shape of response surface from real data, NPMR. Finally, we use NPMR to build response surfaces and quantify T and D from real ecological data sets. We demonstrate how measuring threshold strength and diagonality from multi-factor response surfaces can advance ecology.

Suggested Citation

  • Lintz, Heather E. & McCune, Bruce & Gray, Andrew N. & McCulloh, Katherine A., 2011. "Quantifying ecological thresholds from response surfaces," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(3), pages 427-436.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:222:y:2011:i:3:p:427-436
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.10.017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380010005776
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.10.017?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. G. M. Jacquez & S. Maruca & M.-J. Fortin, 2000. "From fields to objects: A review of geographic boundary analysis," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 221-241, September.
    2. Limburg, Karin E. & O'Neill, Robert V. & Costanza, Robert & Farber, Stephen, 2002. "Complex systems and valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 409-420, June.
    3. Austin, Mike, 2007. "Species distribution models and ecological theory: A critical assessment and some possible new approaches," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 1-19.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Václavík, Tomáš & Meentemeyer, Ross K., 2009. "Invasive species distribution modeling (iSDM): Are absence data and dispersal constraints needed to predict actual distributions?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(23), pages 3248-3258.
    2. Muñoz-Mas, Rafael & Vezza, Paolo & Alcaraz-Hernández, Juan Diego & Martínez-Capel, Francisco, 2016. "Risk of invasion predicted with support vector machines: A case study on northern pike (Esox Lucius, L.) and bleak (Alburnus alburnus, L.)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 342(C), pages 123-134.
    3. Meineri, Eric & Dahlberg, C. Johan & Hylander, Kristoffer, 2015. "Using Gaussian Bayesian Networks to disentangle direct and indirect associations between landscape physiography, environmental variables and species distribution," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 313(C), pages 127-136.
    4. Marmion, Mathieu & Luoto, Miska & Heikkinen, Risto K. & Thuiller, Wilfried, 2009. "The performance of state-of-the-art modelling techniques depends on geographical distribution of species," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(24), pages 3512-3520.
    5. Kaiping Wang & Weiqi Wang & Niyi Zha & Yue Feng & Chenlan Qiu & Yunlu Zhang & Jia Ma & Rui Zhang, 2022. "Spatially Heterogeneity Response of Critical Ecosystem Service Capacity to Address Regional Development Risks to Rapid Urbanization: The Case of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Urban Agglomeration in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-21, June.
    6. Azqueta, Diego & Sotelsek, Daniel, 2007. "Valuing nature: From environmental impacts to natural capital," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 22-30, June.
    7. Aertsen, Wim & Kint, Vincent & van Orshoven, Jos & Özkan, Kürşad & Muys, Bart, 2010. "Comparison and ranking of different modelling techniques for prediction of site index in Mediterranean mountain forests," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(8), pages 1119-1130.
    8. Rufino, Marta M. & Albouy, Camille & Brind'Amour, Anik, 2021. "Which spatial interpolators I should use? A case study applying to marine species," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 449(C).
    9. Stoklosa, Jakub & Huang, Yih-Huei & Furlan, Elise & Hwang, Wen-Han, 2016. "On quadratic logistic regression models when predictor variables are subject to measurement error," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 109-121.
    10. Perez-Maqueo, O. & Intralawan, A. & Martinez, M.L., 2007. "Coastal disasters from the perspective of ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 273-284, August.
    11. Jackie Robinson & Jared Dent & Gabriella Schaffer, 2011. "Integrating scientific assessment of wetland areas and economic evaluation tools to develop an evaluation framework to advise wetland management," Discussion Papers Series 420, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    12. Sam Hui & Eric Bradlow, 2012. "Bayesian multi-resolution spatial analysis with applications to marketing," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 419-452, December.
    13. Boerema, Annelies & Schoelynck, Jonas & Bal, Kris & Vrebos, Dirk & Jacobs, Sander & Staes, Jan & Meire, Patrick, 2014. "Economic valuation of ecosystem services, a case study for aquatic vegetation removal in the Nete catchment (Belgium)," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 46-56.
    14. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo & Paletto, Alessandro & Fath, Brian D., 2015. "Assessing, valuing, and mapping ecosystem services in Alpine forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 12-23.
    15. Moreno-Amat, Elena & Mateo, Rubén G. & Nieto-Lugilde, Diego & Morueta-Holme, Naia & Svenning, Jens-Christian & García-Amorena, Ignacio, 2015. "Impact of model complexity on cross-temporal transferability in Maxent species distribution models: An assessment using paleobotanical data," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 312(C), pages 308-317.
    16. Sahragard, H.P. & Chahouki, M.A. Zare, 2015. "An evaluation of predictive habitat models performance of plant species in Hoze soltan rangelands of Qom province," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 309, pages 64-71.
    17. Mergenthaler, Marcus & Schröter, Iris, 2020. "Institutionelle Grenzen und Perspektiven bei der ökonomischen Bewertung und der Bereitstellung von Tierwohl," 60th Annual Conference, Halle/ Saale, Germany, September 23-25, 2020 305598, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    18. Halvorsen, Rune & Mazzoni, Sabrina & Dirksen, John Wirkola & Næsset, Erik & Gobakken, Terje & Ohlson, Mikael, 2016. "How important are choice of model selection method and spatial autocorrelation of presence data for distribution modelling by MaxEnt?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 328(C), pages 108-118.
    19. Hein, Lars & van Koppen, Kris & de Groot, Rudolf S. & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2006. "Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 209-228, May.
    20. Ekins, Paul & Folke, Carl & De Groot, Rudolf, 2003. "Identifying critical natural capital," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2-3), pages 159-163, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:222:y:2011:i:3:p:427-436. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.